Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>]

Also,

could you please show me where in EA175 there is this reference to the
Amorites being in the Beqa Valley that you keep talking about?

http://www.tau.ac.il/humanities/semitic/EA163-262.html

<http://www.tau.ac.il/humanities/semitic/EA163-262.html>James Christian

On 8 May 2010 08:34, James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com> wrote:

> Jim,
>
> several issues here. Firstly, this thread is about the Amorites. Please
> don't polute with a discussion about the Horites versus Hurrians. There's
> another thread for that discussion.
>
> Secondly, please stop presenting arguments against an identification of
> Kadesh-Barnea or the Gulf of Aqaba. The last I checked nobody is disagreeing
> with you on this. Qadesh was a common name.
>
> Thirdly, we had a thread about El Paran and the evidence is against your
> theory of Oak tree. Alon means Oak tree. Tereminthos means turpentine tree.
> But please don't polute a discussion about the reach of the Amorites with
> these kind of issues.
>
> Finally, you eventually said something on topic. You have singled out one
> particular period in one particular Amarna letter EA175 and limited the
> Amorites to Hasi in the Beqa Valley. The Amorites were primarily nomadic and
> their reach was far beyond one particular city in one particular valley.
> They were all over the place causing an annoyance to neighbours in all
> directions. They were so abundant that the Term Amorite was almost perfectly
> synonymous with the term Canaanite. You seem to have gotten hung up on one
> particular source and be trying to make the story fit into that source in a
> time period which doesn't even align well.
>
> In short, if you want to continue a discussion about the reach of the
> Amorites in various periods then I'm happy to continue analysing the data
> with you but please stay on topic without relying on massively embedded if
> clauses and circular logic.
>
> James Christian
>
>
> On 8 May 2010 05:37, <jimstinehart AT aol.com> wrote:
>
>>  Dear Everyone:
>> 1.  Hurrians
>> If the author of Genesis 14: 6 wanted to reference the historical Hurrians
>> who historically lived in the Transjordan in the Late Bronze Age (per 
>> Amarna
>> Letter EA 197), the most he could be expected to do is to refer to
>> XRY/Horites/Hurrians, and use three words that are redolent of the
>> Transjordan:  (i) HRRM/hill country;  (ii) %(YR/Seir/well-wooded;  and
>> (iii) )YL/a magnificent, mighty oak tree.
>> 2.  Qadesh
>> If the author of Genesis 14: 7 wanted to reference historical Qadesh of
>> Upper Galilee, an important city in the Late Bronze Age, the most he could
>> be expected to do is to use the historically-attested exact spelling from
>> Ugaritic literature, QD$, and pair it with a reference to (YN M$P+/En
>> Mishpat/Eye on Seat of Justice/Eye on Mt. Hermon/Facing (the Radiance of)
>> Mt. Hermon.
>> 3.  Amorites
>> If the author of Genesis 14: 7 wanted to reference the historical Amorites
>> who, per Amarna Letter EA 175, historically were at Hasi in the Beqa Valley
>> in the Late Bronze Age, the most he could be expected to do is to refer to
>> )MRY/Amorites, after the troops of the 4 attacking rulers had 
>> “returned”/$WB
>> from the central Transjordan to the Ashteroth area and then came to Qadesh
>> of Upper Galilee, going north into the Beqa Valley where the Amorites
>> historically lived at Hasi.
>> Genesis 14: 6-7 is fully historical in a Late Bronze Age historical
>> context, and uses fully historical nomenclature.  It’s a perfect match to
>> the world of the Amarna Letters in Year 14, a world that knew no wilderness
>> of Zin and no Gulf of Aqaba, no troglodyte cave-dwellers south of the Dead
>> Sea, and no Kadesh-barnea.
>> Jim Stinehart
>> Evanston, Illinois
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
>> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
>> Sent: Fri, May 7, 2010 2:05 am
>> Subject: [b-hebrew] The Amorites
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the Amorites are identified with the Martu of Akkadian literature. Here is
>> an example of the way they were viewed by their Sumerian neighbours:
>>
>> *The MAR.TU who know no grain.... The MAR.TU who know no house nor town, 
>> the
>> boors of the mountains.... The MAR.TU who digs up truffles... who does not
>> bend his knees (to cultivate the land), who eats raw meat, who has no house
>> during his lifetime, who is not buried after death.*
>> *
>> *
>> The Amorites were primarily a nomadic people. They did not respect
>> territorial boundaries and wandered wherever they pleased so their cattle
>> could eat whatever the land offered. Civilised neighbours who worked and
>> cultivated the land obviously did not take a liking to Amorite tribes
>> wandering in and eating the fruits of their labours.
>>
>> The assumption that the wandering Amorites never reached as far as Oases to
>> the South of Dead Sea is not only baseless but almost certainly incorrect.
>>
>> James Christian
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing 
>> listb-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
>>
>